+1 To Ivica's proposal and rationale. There are plenty of people willing to help with development and maintenance. If a Max 4.6 compatibility library is really necessary, perhaps that could be the fork with the new name.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Ivica Ico Bukvic <i...@vt.edu> wrote: > FWIW, Fred, if there is a way to convince you to allow for adding new > objects, I would certainly like to second that. In the eyes of new pd users > who are familiar with Max, Cyclone is not only a Max 4.6 compatibility > library, it is first and foremost Max compatibility library and that would > suggest newer objects should be in there. I imagine the only reason they > simply weren't already added is likely due to lack of a developer and > maintainer. The last thing pd community needs is yet another library that > may end-up without a maintainer. The confusion one will have to deal with > by creating cyclone/prepend vs. <some-other-lib>/pong is pointless at best. > If maintaining library overhead is a concern, please note we've already > done a fair amount of creating updated help files for the entire cyclone > library in pd-l2ork, as well as fixing and upgrading a number of objects, > all of which I've gladly shared with you and continue to contribute as much > as you allow and my time permits. But please, let's not start yet another > library. If anything, we should look into consolidating. Pd-L2Ork has > already started doing this. e.g. one of the examples brought up regarding > Eric Lyon's potpourri and cyclone's cartopol~ and poltocar~, in pd-l2ork, > potpourri objects are not being built because they are not necessary. All > this with the goal of eventually doing away with > subfolders/declares/imports and other middleware and simply having all the > best externals in one folder and getting rid of the rest (or perhaps adding > them in the unsupported/legacy subfolder). In such an ecosystem PD META > will take care of the attribution and bug reporting and we'll be all better > for it, particularly in terms of encouraging new users to join the pd > community. > > > On 2/17/2016 1:33 PM, Fred Jan Kraan wrote: > >> Hi Alexandre, >> >> Howdy, if you understand only a part of it, I know that I know about >>> nothing. >>> >>> But hey, as I understand it, there's quite some work to make it (loading >>> the weird name objects without [declare]) happen and you'd rather focus >>> on other fixes, cool. >>> >>> Well, I'm just starting using github >>> https://github.com/porres/pd-cyclone >>> < >>> https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fporres%2Fpd-cyclone&h=FAQF6upTy> >>> and >>> have mobilized others to collaborate with new objects for cyclone, >>> according to that list I shared these days. >>> >>> You may have noticed a pull request already for [pong]. I'm working with >>> someone else and we should be having scale / scale~ / atodb / dbtoa / >>> atodb~ / dbtoa~ / trunc~ ready quite soon! >>> >> >> Yes, I noticed. I appreciate all you do for pd and cyclone in particular, >> but I cannot accept the request. Cyclone is one of the few libraries with a >> closed set of objects; only those part of Max/MSP, arbitrary set around >> version 4.6 or 5. >> >> Cyclone is already quite big, with 150+ objects. This seems a good reason >> to be selective in which objects should be added. Just because objects are >> or should be in Max/MSP is not reason enough. If it exists in another >> library, it is unneeded IMHO. >> >>> >>> I can bother myself to try and deal with the issues regarding these >>> objects, but I think a start could be to create new objects with the >>> unweird names, this is not in conflict with Max compatibility, as it >>> also loads these objects via the same way (again, they'd be: >>> /greaterthan~ / greaterthaneq~ / lessthan~ / lessthaneq~ / equals~ / >>> notequals~ / plusequals~ / rminus~ / rminus / rdiv~ / rdiv / modulo~/). >>> It wouldn't get in conflict with current state of cyclone either and the >>> help files of these objects could refer to nettles and all. Cool? Later >>> on in the game I can try and figure out how to load them without declare. >>> >> >> Personally I have no issue with [declare] as it is vanilla. Or with the >> weird names; if you want un-weird names, abstractions (containing [declare] >> should work too? >> >>> >>> cheers >>> >>> cheers >>> >> >> Greetings, >> >> Fred Jan >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list